Educators Criticize Creation MuseumEducators Criticize Creation Museum
A new $27 million museum that tells a biblical version of the Earth’s creation is drawing fire from science educators, who say the exhibits are scientifically inaccurate.
By Dylan T. Lovan, AP

A museum where Adam and Eve share exhibit space with dinosaurs is drawing criticism from groups of science educators as it nears completion.

The $27 million Creation Museum, a few miles south of Cincinnati, tells a biblical version of the Earth's history, asserting that the planet is just a few thousand years old and man and the giant lizards once coexisted.

The educators say its exhibits, inspired by the Old Testament, are geared toward children but lack scientific evidence.

"When they try to confuse (kids) about what is science and what isn't science, scientists have an obligation to speak out," said Lawrence Krauss, an author and physics professor at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland. "There's no doubt these are documented lies."

Krauss has signed one of two petitions circulated by national groups this week that challenge the facility's exhibits.

The museum, built by the nonprofit ministry Answers in Genesis with private donations, includes a 200-seat special-effects theater, a 40-foot-tall depiction of Noah's Ark and robotic, roaring dinosaurs. The 60,000 square-foot facility in rural Petersburg, Ky., opened to the public on Memorial Day with over 4,000 visitors, according to the museum's website.

Answers in Genesis founder Ken Ham said the vast majority of natural history museums and textbooks available to students are devoted to teaching evolution.

"And they're worried about one creation museum?" he said. "I think they're really concerned that we're going to get information out that they don't want people to hear."

Ham said critics need to tour the museum before making judgments.

One of the petitions, started by the Campaign to Defend the Constitution, a Washington, D.C., group that focuses on church and state issues, says the museum is part of a "campaign by the religious right to inject creationist teachings into science education."

Krauss said about 2,000 educators, mostly university-level, have signed the petition. A second petition from the National Center for Science Education sent to educators in Indiana, Kentucky and Ohio had attracted support from nearly 600 university professors. It says there are scientifically inaccurate exhibits at the museum.

"The nature of the science process that's presented at the Answers in Genesis museum is very different from how science is really done by real scientists," said Eugenie Scott, executive director of the Oakland, Calif., group, which promotes the teaching of evolution in the classroom.

Scientists say Earth is several billion years old, and that the first dinosaurs appeared around 200 million years ago, dying out well before the first human ancestors arose a few million years ago.

Ham maintains the museum exhibits, some of which include fossils, are based on scientific findings. He said the staff is stocked with scientists trained at secular universities.

"We use the same science they do," Ham said. "What they're really saying is they disagree with our beliefs about history, about the Bible, but we use the same science and genetics they do."

Scott, Krauss and others said Ham has a right to open the museum, but they are concerned with the effect it could have on science education in public schools.

"We're not talking about free speech. We would not protest the museum," said Alan Leshner, head of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, which publishes the journal Science. "However, we are concerned that we not mislead young people inadvertently or intentionally about what science is showing."

Ham said the museum will attract home-schooled kids and students from Christian schools, but he said there are no plans to reach out to public schools. Admission for children ages 5 to 12 will be $9.95, and $19.95 for most adults.

"We're not targeting the public schools," Ham said. "I suspect by intimidation and threats of lawsuits, I doubt whether public school students, as an official tour, would come."

Ham said the museum will draw an estimated 250,000 visitors in its first year, and TV and newspaper advertising will begin soon in six major metro areas.

its when religion tries to oust science as the source of truth that i become agitated, as should anyone else with half a brain.

do you want your kids going to this museum?

I would have no issues at all with my kids going to this museum. I also think creationism should be taught in school along side of evolution. Evolution is only a scientific theory, so the theory that is depicted in the Bible should be taught as well. It's funny how the scientific are so liberal in their thinking and ways, but when it comes to the Bible their so close-minded.

Well if you really looked at science you could make up your own mind.If you question its authenticity then investigate it yourself.

How is it possible to have a fossil of a human foot print in a dinosaur track?

If each 1 of the clearly defined layers of rock was layed over millions of yrs how can a fossilized tree that must be starved of 02 to keep from decaying be found running verticaly through numerous layers of rock?Did it last for 200 million yrs in an upright position so that these layers could form?Looks like the work of a global flood.

If coal takes million of yrs to form how could human artifacts have been found in it?

How are there pictures painted of dinosaurs by Central and south American cultures (Aztecs,Incas...) if they never saw them?

Check out some creation sites and then make a judgement call.Spewing hate doesnt bode well for anyone or there cause whether right or wrong.

Trust in the LORD with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct your paths . Proverbs 3:5-6

Well if you really looked at science you could make up your own mind.If you question its authenticity then investigate it yourself.

How is it possible to have a fossil of a human foot print in a dinosaur track?

If each 1 of the clearly defined layers of rock was layed over millions of yrs how can a fossilized tree that must be starved of 02 to keep from decaying be found running verticaly through numerous layers of rock?Did it last for 200 million yrs in an upright position so that these layers could form?Looks like the work of a global flood.

If coal takes million of yrs to form how could human artifacts have been found in it?

How are there pictures painted of dinosaurs by Central and south American cultures (Aztecs,Incas...) if they never saw them?

Check out some creation sites and then make a judgement call.Spewing hate doesnt bode well for anyone or there cause whether right or wrong.

I would have no issues at all with my kids going to this museum. I also think creationism should be taught in school along side of evolution. Evolution is only a scientific theory, so the theory that is depicted in the Bible should be taught as well. It's funny how the scientific are so liberal in their thinking and ways, but when it comes to the Bible their so close-minded.

I think you need to recheck your understanding of the word "theory".

Creationism does not qualify as a theory, nor is there any objective evidence that would qualify it to be taught in a "science" class.

Evolutionary Muse - Inspire to Evolve
BPS - Where Body meets Performance
Flawless Skin Couture - We give you the tools to make you Flawless

The term "Dinosaur" was created fairly recently in human history. Prior to 1841, Dinosaurs were referred to as "Dragons". Marco Polo, for instance, claimed that the Emperor of China raised Dragons to pull his chariots in parades. If your interest has been piqued, go ahead and search, since we have the internet, for any number of recorded historical encounters with dragons and see if it doesn't match up perfectly with certain Dinosaurs.

"theory".A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

When has evolution ever been repeatedly tested?

So predictions about evolution are based on what?

I especially like the devised to explain part.

Trust in the LORD with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct your paths . Proverbs 3:5-6

I would have no issues at all with my kids going to this museum. I also think creationism should be taught in school along side of evolution. Evolution is only a scientific theory, so the theory that is depicted in the Bible should be taught as well. It's funny how the scientific are so liberal in their thinking and ways, but when it comes to the Bible their so close-minded.

oh jeez...

The biology of evolution is fact. The mechanism of evolution is theory. There is no doubt that evolution does occur.

Well if you really looked at science you could make up your own mind.If you question its authenticity then investigate it yourself.

How is it possible to have a fossil of a human foot print in a dinosaur track?

If each 1 of the clearly defined layers of rock was layed over millions of yrs how can a fossilized tree that must be starved of 02 to keep from decaying be found running verticaly through numerous layers of rock?Did it last for 200 million yrs in an upright position so that these layers could form?Looks like the work of a global flood.

If coal takes million of yrs to form how could human artifacts have been found in it?

How are there pictures painted of dinosaurs by Central and south American cultures (Aztecs,Incas...) if they never saw them?

Check out some creation sites and then make a judgement call.Spewing hate doesnt bode well for anyone or there cause whether right or wrong.

Do we really need to go here?

1. "How is it possible to have a fossil of a human foot print in a dinosaur track?"
It's not...
"For many years claims were made by strict creationists that human footprints or "giant man tracks" occur alongside dinosaur tracks in the limestone beds of the Paluxy River, near Glen Rose Texas. If true, such a finding would dramatically contradict the conventional geologic timetable, which holds that humans did not appear on earth until over 60 million years after the dinosaurs became extinct. However, the "man track" claims have not stood up to close scientific scrutiny, and have been abandoned even by most creationists. The supposed human tracks have involved a variety of phenomena, including forms of elongate (metatarsal) dinosaur tracks, erosional features, indistinct markings of uncertain origin, and some doctored and carved specimens (most of the latter on loose blocks of rock).

2. "If each 1 of the clearly defined layers of rock was layed over millions of yrs how can a fossilized tree that must be starved of 02 to keep from decaying be found running verticaly through numerous layers of rock?Did it last for 200 million yrs in an upright position so that these layers could form?Looks like the work of a global flood."

Or, most likely:
"They have natural explanations: tree-roots that grew into soft, underlying layers of clay, and fossils found in inclined strata.

"Malone, along with many "young Earth global flood creationists", have no idea that even data from the 19th century, presented by a creationist geologist is enough to demolish the "polystrate fossil trees" part of their presentation. "Polystrate fossil trees" are probably one of the weakest pieces of evidence YEGF creationists can offer for their interpretation."

Well thats all well and good but why didnt these trees decompose? They just became fossilised while standing over millenia without decayor destruction by insects?

What about the artifacts with dinosaurs drawn on them?The Incas clearly painting tricerotops and brontosaurs was all accidentally factual and anotomically correct?

Where is there a transitional form of anything?Since these forms were "better suited due to the evo theory" then they should have out lived and profipherated while the lesser forms died out.But yet there are men and apes and nothing in the middle.

And talking about doctored evidence.How many missing link type apes had been doctored and proved fraudulent?

Trust in the LORD with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct your paths . Proverbs 3:5-6

Nothing in the article you posted has anything to do with science or the scientific method. I have zero problem with someone having their own personal religious beliefs. Great. But it is not science. I don't have a problem with classes on religion. However, religion is not science and, therefore, does not have a place in a science class. I would ask many of those that want to teach creationism or intelligent design in science classes, which religion's creation stories they would like to include? Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, Ancient Mayan, Aztez, etc, etc, etc. Religious beliefs, Christian "creationism" for example, cannot be tested by the scientific method, so are not science.

Nothing in the article you posted has anything to do with science or the scientific method. I have zero problem with someone having their own personal religious beliefs. Great. But it is not science. I don't have a problem with classes on religion. However, religion is not science and, therefore, does not have a place in a science class. I would ask many of those that want to teach creationism or intelligent design in science classes, which religion's creation stories they would like to include? Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, Ancient Mayan, Aztez, etc, etc, etc. Religious beliefs, Christian "creationism" for example, cannot be tested by the scientific method, so are not science.

Religion is religion, science is science.

Here, here!

"Evolution does not violate the second law of thermodynamics. Order emerges from disorder all the time. Snowflakes form, trees grow, and embryos develop, etc"

Ugh...no transitional forms?
Here are a few:Coelophysis (late Triassic) -- One of the first theropod dinosaurs. Theropods in general show clear general skeletal affinities with birds (long limbs, hollow bones, foot with 3 toes in front and 1 reversed toe behind, long ilium). Jurassic theropods like Compsognathus are particularly similar to birds. Deinonychus, Oviraptor, and other advanced theropods (late Jurassic, Cretaceous) -- Predatory bipedal advanced theropods, larger, with more bird-like skeletal features: semilunate carpal, bony sternum, long arms, reversed pubis. Clearly runners, though, not fliers. These advanced theropods even had clavicles, sometimes fused as in birds. Says Clark (1992): "The detailed similarity between birds and theropod dinosaurs such as Deinonychus is so striking and so pervasive throughout the skeleton that a considerable amount of special pleading is needed to come to any conclusion other than that the sister-group of birds among fossils is one of several theropod dinosaurs." The particular fossils listed here are are not directly ancestral, though, as they occur after Archeopteryx. Lisboasaurus estesi & other "troodontid dinosaur-birds" (mid-Jurassic) -- A bird-like theropod reptile with very bird-like teeth (that is, teeth very like those of early toothed birds, since modern birds have no teeth). These really could be ancestral

Well these so called transitional species are dead so that takes me back to my previous point.Were they transitional or just strange reptiles?

Where do you get that most Catholics and Christians in general believe in evo?This whole debate can be boiled down to this if one believes there is no Creator (God) then there must be another way to explain creation.

So everything that is came from what wasnt?That doesnt seem logical to me.It takes MUCH more faith to believe in evo than to believe in The Creator.

Trust in the LORD with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct your paths . Proverbs 3:5-6

Nothing in the article you posted has anything to do with science or the scientific method. I have zero problem with someone having their own personal religious beliefs. Great. But it is not science. I don't have a problem with classes on religion. However, religion is not science and, therefore, does not have a place in a science class. I would ask many of those that want to teach creationism or intelligent design in science classes, which religion's creation stories they would like to include? Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, Ancient Mayan, Aztez, etc, etc, etc. Religious beliefs, Christian "creationism" for example, cannot be tested by the scientific method, so are not science.

Religion is religion, science is science.

Maybe you should learn to read then! I said in the first sentence or two that "religion" had nothing to do with it, and yes, I gave plenty of science. Until you can answer the scientific questions I posed, don't bother dismissing it. Creationism is not a religion, it's an explanation of the observed universe.

"As far as the experts Strobel chose, he is, frankly, misleading about their qualifications. While he touts that all of the people he interviews are "doctorate-level", he doesn't mention that most of them are NOT doctorates in the fields they were interviewed! Rather, most of them have doctorates in philosophy or theology, and perhaps undergraduate degrees in a related science. But he is clearly leading the reader to believe he has picked doctorate-level experts in the fields they are being interviewed for, but, with a few exceptions, they are not. For each expert, Strobel spends at least a few paragraphs extolling the qualifications of his expert, while conveniently neglecting to mention that their doctorate is not in the field of discussion."

Well these so called transitional species are dead so that takes me back to my previous point.Were they transitional or just strange reptiles?

Where do you get that most Catholics and Christians in general believe in evo?This whole debate can be boiled down to this if one believes there is no Creator (God) then there must be another way to explain creation.

So everything that is came from what wasnt?That doesnt seem logical to me.It takes MUCH more faith to believe in evo than to believe in The Creator.

the problem here is that 1 side is offering an answer, and the other isnt.

scientists- not sure how the universe was created
religious tards- god created it

personally, i am MUCH more comfortable with the scientific lack of explanation than something that is simply made up in a book.

btw there are dozens of creation stories...what makes the christian one correct???

"As far as the experts Strobel chose, he is, frankly, misleading about their qualifications. While he touts that all of the people he interviews are "doctorate-level", he doesn't mention that most of them are NOT doctorates in the fields they were interviewed! Rather, most of them have doctorates in philosophy or theology, and perhaps undergraduate degrees in a related science. But he is clearly leading the reader to believe he has picked doctorate-level experts in the fields they are being interviewed for, but, with a few exceptions, they are not. For each expert, Strobel spends at least a few paragraphs extolling the qualifications of his expert, while conveniently neglecting to mention that their doctorate is not in the field of discussion."

That's what I call good science! (Not! in Borat Accent)

Well, I will certainly investigate that and weigh that accordingly, nonetheless, facts are facts and just because you feel they lack the qualifications to state them does not preclude reality. I may not be qualified to change a tire, but if I do, it is nonetheless changed and can not be denied.

lol, read it again! All your examples have a cause. they are all seeded or they wouldn't form smart guy. Thanks for providing even more evidence! Nothing can cause itself.

"The second law of thermodynamics says no such thing. It says that heat will not spontaneously flow from a colder body to a warmer one or, equivalently, that total entropy (a measure of useful energy) in a closed system will not decrease. This does not prevent increasing order because
the earth is not a closed system; sunlight (with low entropy) shines on it and heat (with higher entropy) radiates off. This flow of energy, and the change in entropy that accompanies it, can and will power local decreases in entropy on earth.
entropy is not the same as disorder. Sometimes the two correspond, but sometimes order increases as entropy increases. (Aranda-Espinoza et al. 1999; Kestenbaum 1998) Entropy can even be used to produce order, such as in the sorting of molecules by size (Han and Craighead 2000).
even in a closed system, pockets of lower entropy can form if they are offset by increased entropy elsewhere in the system.
In short, order from disorder happens on earth all the time.

The only processes necessary for evolution to occur are reproduction, heritable variation, and selection. All of these are seen to happen all the time, so, obviously, no physical laws are preventing them. In fact, connections between evolution and entropy have been studied in depth, and never to the detriment of evolution (Demetrius 2000).

Several scientists have proposed that evolution and the origin of life is driven by entropy (McShea 1998). Some see the information content of organisms subject to diversification according to the second law (Brooks and Wiley 1988), so organisms diversify to fill empty niches much as a gas expands to fill an empty container. Others propose that highly ordered complex systems emerge and evolve to dissipate energy (and increase overall entropy) more efficiently (Schneider and Kay 1994)."

"Creationists themselves make claims that directly contradict their claims about the second law of thermodynamics, such as hydrological sorting of fossils during the Flood."

Well, I will certainly investigate that and weigh that accordingly, nonetheless, facts are facts and just because you feel they lack the qualifications to state them does not preclude reality. I may not be qualified to change a tire, but if I do, it is nonetheless changed and can not be denied.

Who would you rather do open heart surgery on you?
a) Board Certified Surgeon of 20 years
b) Joe Schmoe 1st year of med school

So you don't have a "religion" you just follow your own drum?
Truth meaning.....?

FYI:
"When the pope came to the subject of the scientific merits of evolution, it soon became clear how much things had changed in the nearly since the Vatican last addressed the issue. John Paul said:

Today, almost half a century after publication of the encyclical, new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis. It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge. The convergence, neither sought nor fabricated, of the results of work that was conducted independently is in itself a significant argument in favor of the theory.

Evolution, a doctrine that Pius XII only acknowledged as an unfortunate possibility, John Paul accepts forty-six years later “as an effectively proven fact.” (ROA, 82)"

scientists- not sure how the universe was createdreligious tards- god created itthe maturity level is astounding.Being a biology major Id figure you would have something more appropriate to say than that.

personally, i am MUCH more comfortable with the scientific lack of explanation (so you do have a faith system)than something that is simply made up in a book. like the theory of evolution?
QUOTE]

Trust in the LORD with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct your paths . Proverbs 3:5-6

"The second law of thermodynamics says no such thing. It says that heat will not spontaneously flow from a colder body to a warmer one or, equivalently, that total entropy (a measure of useful energy) in a closed system will not decrease. This does not prevent increasing order because
the earth is not a closed system; sunlight (with low entropy) shines on it and heat (with higher entropy) radiates off. This flow of energy, and the change in entropy that accompanies it, can and will power local decreases in entropy on earth.
entropy is not the same as disorder. Sometimes the two correspond, but sometimes order increases as entropy increases. (Aranda-Espinoza et al. 1999; Kestenbaum 1998) Entropy can even be used to produce order, such as in the sorting of molecules by size (Han and Craighead 2000).
even in a closed system, pockets of lower entropy can form if they are offset by increased entropy elsewhere in the system.
In short, order from disorder happens on earth all the time.

The only processes necessary for evolution to occur are reproduction, heritable variation, and selection. All of these are seen to happen all the time, so, obviously, no physical laws are preventing them. In fact, connections between evolution and entropy have been studied in depth, and never to the detriment of evolution (Demetrius 2000).

Several scientists have proposed that evolution and the origin of life is driven by entropy (McShea 1998). Some see the information content of organisms subject to diversification according to the second law (Brooks and Wiley 1988), so organisms diversify to fill empty niches much as a gas expands to fill an empty container. Others propose that highly ordered complex systems emerge and evolve to dissipate energy (and increase overall entropy) more efficiently (Schneider and Kay 1994)."

"Creationists themselves make claims that directly contradict their claims about the second law of thermodynamics, such as hydrological sorting of fossils during the Flood."

I am speaking of Universal law, not simply planetary conditions. The universe is finite and the Second Law does apply, necessarily. Nothing comes from nothing. Something can NOT come from nothing, not of itself. That's not your personal, everyday observation is it? You seem sensible so be honest with yourself and be sensible. Look, I don't belong to a church, I am not fond or religion either! But don't take it out on reality, please.